No abstract

Subject-performed tasks (SPTs; i.e., carrying out the actions during study) improve free recall of action phrases without enhancing relational information. By this mechanism, items pop into a person's mind without active search, and this process especially extends the recency effect. The authors demonstrated the existence of the extended recency effect and its importance for the SPT recall advantage (Experiments 1 and 2). Carrying out the action and not semantic processing caused the effect (Experiment 3). The extended recency effect was also not a consequence of a deliberate last-in, first-out strategy (Experiment 4), and performing a difficult secondary task (an arithmetic task) during recall reduced memory performances but did not influence the extended recency effect (Experiment 5). These data support the theory that performing actions during study enhances the efficiency of an automatic pop-out mechanism in free recall.

Two representative samples of adult Norwegians (n=2000) were asked a set of general and specific questions regarding their beliefs and opinions about human memory. The results indicate that on many questions, such as time of the earliest memories, inhibiting effects of collaboration, and memory for dramatic versus ordinary events, the views of the general public concurred with current research findings, and people in general had realistic views about their own memory performance. On other questions, such as the reliability of olfactory as compared with visual and auditory memory, the memory of small children in comparison with that of adults, the likelihood of repression of adult traumatic memories, and on more general questions such as the possibility of training memory and the capacity limitations of long-term memory, a large proportion of the participants expressed views that are less supported by scientific evidence. Implications of these findings are briefly discussed.

The present study was inspired by an experimental report by Cohen (1981). where recall of subject performed minitasks was demonstrated to give serial position curves without primacy effect. The question raised was whether this deviation implied the formulation of new memory laws. Eight new experiments were conducted. Two of them replicated Cohen's observations; one with concretely performed acts, and one with symbolically performed acts. A third experiment examined recall of proposed, nonperformed acts, with results similar to those found in the other minitask experiments. Four experiments studied the effect of visually imagining act performance, again with results which demonstrated the existence of interesting similarities between the different types of act recall. Several of the experiments explored the role of self‐involvement and task familiarity, and the last experiment was specially designed to test a task‐difficulty hypothesis. The results were discussed in terms of a representation‐system theory, a nonstrategic lack‐of‐rehearsal interpretation, and in terms of a general problem‐solving account. None of these theories were found, all observations taken together, to have been clearly supported or clearly disproved, and more evidence was therefore deemed necessary before new memory laws need to be postulated.